Upstream VS downstream human rights

Human rights, as a downstream effort, move from standards set internationally progressively towards people’s daily lives.

The international framework of human rights has involved setting standards that are laid out in Coventants and Declarations. The downstream movement also engages in attempts to monitor how States observe many of these obligations. Finally, it has developed a few ways to seek to enforce State compliance with these standards. As these enforcement measures are arguably not legally binding on States however, and there is no formal legal means for the State to be compelled to comply, State response to efforts to compliance efforts have been extremely weak. One example is the fate of Concluding Observations of the Treaty Bodies concerning both country reports and individual complaints. This has left the downstream movement often stuck on further elaborating rights and duties.

Some other limitations to the downstream effort that highlight the need for another approach:

1. The international standards are in the form of formal law. However, this requires a functioning and independent legal system, judiciary, police etc. This is far from the reality in many States.

2. The values that the human rights norms enforce are often not accepted by dominating cultural or political systems in States or communities. People may also not be aware of or may not identify with the formulations of these rights. They are often not attuned to their context or their interpretation of their human dignity.

3. The human rights norms do not often correspond to local values. They are defined in a way that they lack a significant component of local notions of justice and balance. They do not provide the whole picture. For example, rights tend to be formulated in a rather absolute manner: everyone has the right to …, whereas the struggle for social justice has to be directed against substantive socio-economic inequality that is of a relative nature.

The upstream human rights movement sees rights more as they really are: an ongoing collective human struggle, involving dynamic processes of resistance and change that engage and transform unequal relations of power. It sees also that rights can only be achieved through the involvement and empowerment of the community as a whole, particularly those whose rights are most violated. Upstream efforts are grounded in people’s needs. They use the normative human rights standards as powerful, political resources for transformative, action-oriented social change. Upstream human rights provide tools for these communities:

• To define themselves what are their fundamental needs to respect and protect their basic human dignity that are not being met

• To identify who is responsible for this and analyze the possible entry points for action
• To take action, formal and informal, to change the conditions preventing the satisfaction of these needs

Upstream human rights efforts accept that human rights may not be entrenched within an accessible, independent and effective legal system where citizens can readily make claims. It accepts that there may be social, cultural and political realities that prevent people from being able to make claims, even where there is an enforceable legal system. It seeks to move beyond these formal mechanisms of protection to engage in a broader struggle. This struggle involves a process of confrontation against and transformation of unequal power ideologies, relationships and structures that deny rights. And it is this in fact that is the critical function of international rights.

Some key tools of the upstream human rights movement are to:

• Use the accepted international human rights framework as a political benchmark of what conduct is legitimate or reasonable to pressure the authorities to meet people’s needs;
• Build networks and coalitions to strengthen the movement against unjust forces;
• Conduct education and awareness-raising projects, including about their human rights;
• Negotiate responsibilities with authorities at different levels;
• Lobby and advocate in favour of one’s cause, with local, national, regional and international powers;
• Confront not just the State, but also other actors whose action impinges on people’s basic human rights, including corporations, businesses, traditional leaders and development agencies;
• Run creative judicial test-cases to challenge the system;
• Move from local values, attuned to the local context.

Human rights construed in this way are powerful resources to help those living in poverty to themselves overcome the serious constraints in their daily struggles for sustainable livelihoods.

These strategies are critical to move beyond the traditional protest oriented and monitoring approach to human rights strategies. Upstream strategies seek to present concrete alternatives grounded in people’s needs and mobilisation. These alternatives aim towards sustainable solutions, to re-characterise the State, and other duty-bearers, and re-negotiate their engagement with the people.

All aspects of the human rights-based approach are entrenched in upstream efforts: use of the human rights framework, empowerment, participation, accountability, and attention to vulnerable groups. Human rights-based strategies must use both upstream and downstream processes: they require use of the current systems within society as well as expansion beyond them where necessary. However, given the role of these systems in creating and perpetuating poverty, upstream efforts must be central in order for those living in poverty to claim rights, redress injustice and ensure access to political and economic resources.

For a good image of how upstream human rights-based strategies are applied, go to the Good Practices page.